Ron Paul on Gun Control

FactCheck: Terroristic shootings do occur with guns around

Rep. Paul states in "Liberty Defined" that terror attacks occur in gun-free zones, but never at places like gun shows. But the Fort Hood shooting occurred 18 months prior to his book's publication.

On pp. 144-5 of his book, Rep. Paul asserts, "I don't
really believe 'gun-free' zones make any difference. If they did, why would the worst shootings consistently happen in gun-free zones such as schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are unheard of at gun and
knife shows, the antithesis of a gun-free zone."

At Ft. Hood in Texas, on Nov. 5, 2009, a gunman shot and killed 13 people and wounded 29 others. The shooting was a terroristic attack; the gunman had written, "fighting against the US army is an Islamic
duty". According to Wikipedia.com, numerous of his victims were armed soldiers; at least two fired at the shooter during his rampage.

Rep. Paul is simply mistaken in his assertion; the Fort Hood incident should have been cited as a counter-example.

No negligence lawsuits against gun manufacturers

To his credit--and somewhat incongruous--Rep. Paul voted against a measure that would allow negligence lawsuits against gun manufacturers, for liability protection for manufacturers of certain gasoline additives,
and for a bill that would move national class-action lawsuits out of local state courts to federal courts in order to stop the pernicious practice of court shopping.

Gun-free zones don't make any difference

Gun-control advocates tell us that removing guns from society makes us safer. But that is simply an impossibility. The fact is that firearm technology exists. It cannot be uninvented. As long as there is metalworking and welding capability, it matters no
what gun laws are imposed upon law-abiding people. Those who wish to have guns, and disregard the law, will have guns. Paradoxically, gun control clears a path for violence and makes aggression more likely, whether the aggressor is a terrorist or a
government. I don't really believe "gun-free" zones make any difference. If they did, why would the worst shootings consistently happen in gun-free zones such as schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are
unheard of at gun and knife shows, the antithesis of a gun-free zone. It bears repeating that an armed society truly is a polite society. Even if you don't like guns and don't want to own them, you benefit from those who do.

Let airlines make rules about passenger guns to fight terror

Q: You have said that the 9/11 attackers might have had second thoughts if they’d felt that some of the passengers aboard the airplanes might have been armed.

A: You’re quoting me incorrectly. I said the responsibility for protecting passengers falls
with the airline, not the government--and not the passengers. The airline’s responsible for the aircraft and the passengers. If we wouldn’t have been dependent on the federal government to set all the rules, which meant no guns & no resistance, then the
terrorists may well have had second thoughts, because the airlines would have had the responsibility. But we assumed the government was going to take care of us. After 9/11, instead of moving toward the direction of personal responsibility & private
property & 2nd amendment, we moved in the opposite direction. We turned it over to the federal government. Private industry protects their property all the time. But here is one example when the federal government was involved and they messed it up.

Opposes the DC Gun Ban; it’s not just a “collective right”

An appeals court in Washington DC issued a ruling that hopefully will result in the restoration of 2nd Amendment rights in the nation’s capital. It appears the Court rejected the DC’s nonsensical argument that the 2nd Amendment confers only a “collective
right,” something gun control advocates have asserted for years. Rights, by definition, are individual. “Group rights” is an oxymoron.

When the 2nd Amendment speaks of a “well-regulated militia,” it means local groups of individuals operating to
protect their own families, homes, and communities. They regulated themselves because it was necessary and in their own interest to do so. The Founders themselves wrote in the Federalist papers about the need for individuals to be armed.

Gun control
makes people demonstrably less safe--as any honest examination of criminal statistics reveals. It is no coincidence that violent crime flourishes in the nation’s capital, where the individual’s right to self-defense has been most severely curtailed.

Source: Weekly column, “Texas Straight Talk”
, Mar 12, 2007

Ease procedures on the purchase and registration of firearms

Indicate which principles you support concerning gun issues.

Ease procedures on the purchase and registration of firearms.

Repeal all bans and measures that restrict law-abiding citizens from owning legally-obtained firearms.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers.

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. A YES vote would:

Prohibit individuals from filing a qualified civil liability action

Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime

Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect

Dismiss of all civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Vote to pass a bill that would prohibit liability lawsuits from being brought against gun manufacturers and dealers based on the criminal misuse of firearms. The bill would also block these actions from being brought up against gun trade organizations and against ammunition makers and sellers. The measure would apply immediately to any pending cases. Several specific exceptions to the ban exist. This includes civil suits would be allowed against a maker or dealer who "knowingly and willfully violated" state or federal laws in the selling or marketing of a weapon. Design and manufacturing defect lawsuits are also permitted when weapons are "used as intended.

While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly three million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs.

The following ratings are based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionaire sent to all Congressional candidates; the NRA assigned a letter grade (with A+ being the highest and F being the lowest).

Sponsored bill against United Nations taxation on firearms.

Paul sponsored against United Nations taxation on firearms

OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: Prohibits appropriated funds from being used by any US official to promote any action by the UN which advocates the taxation of firearms or any other abrogation of rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Condemns all proposals to tax or otherwise limit rights under the Second Amendment.

SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Rep. PAUL: This legislation prohibits taxpayer support of any UN actions that could in any way infringe on the Second Amendment. The bill also expresses the sense of Congress that proposals to tax, or otherwise limit, the right to keep and bear arms are "reprehensible and deserving of condemnation."

Over the past decade, the UN has waged a campaign to undermine the right to keep and bear arms, which is protected by the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has called on members of the Security Council to "tackle" the proliferation and "easy availability"
of small arms and light weapons. Just this June, the UN tried to "tackle" gun rights by sponsoring a "Week of Action Against Small Arms." Of course, by small arms, the UN really means all privately owned firearms.

Contrary to the UN propaganda, the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right and, according to the drafters of the Constitution, the guardian of every other right. Many victims of tyranny were first disarmed by their governments. If the UN is successful in implementing a global regime of gun control, then more innocent lives will be lost to public (and private) criminals. I would remind my colleagues that policies prohibiting the private ownership of firearms were strongly supported by tyrants such as Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tong. Global gun control is a recipe for global tyranny and a threat to the safety of all law-abiding persons.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to House Committee on International Relations; never came to a vote.

Require video recording of every firearm test by ATF.

Paul co-sponsored Fairness in Firearm Testing Act

Directs the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to make a video recording of the entire process of its examination and testing of an item for the purpose of determining whether the item is a firearm (and if so, the type of firearm) or ammunition. Bars ATF from editing or erasing any such recording.

Directs ATF to make available a digital video disc that contains a copy of the recording: (1) at the request of a person who claims an ownership interest in such item; and (2) to a defendant in a criminal proceeding involving such item.

Provides that an item which ATF has determined is a firearm or ammunition shall not be admissible as evidence unless: (1) ATF has complied with the requirements of this Act to make its digital video disc available; or (2) such compliance has been waived in writing by the person against whom the item is offered as evidence.

Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC.

Nothing in any provision of law shall authorize the Mayor, or any governmental authority of the District of Columbia, to prohibit possessing firearms by a person who is allowed to possess firearms under federal law.

Denies the District any authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.

Repeals the ban on semiautomatic weapons.

Repeals the District's registration requirement for possession of firearms.

Repeals the trigger lock law.

Maintains the current ban on the possession and control of a sawed-off shotgun, machine gun, or short-barreled rifle.

Eliminates criminal penalties for possessing an unregistered firearm.

Specifies exceptions to the prohibition against carrying concealed weapons in the District.

Liberty Candidate: no point in keeping guns you can't access.

Paul signed 2010 Congressional endorsement list

A Liberty Candidate will Defend the Great American Principles of Individual Liberty and Constitutional Government, [such as the views of] Rand Paul, Senate 2010 candidate from Kentucky, on Personal Liberty: "The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights. America can prosper, preserve personal liberty, and repel national security threats without intruding into the personal lives of its citizens."

And [such as the views of] Chris Cantwell, Congress 2010 candidate from New York on the 2nd Amendment: " 'To keep and bear Arms.' That means, you can obtain them, keep them, and carry them. The idea that you can only have an unloaded gun in your closet under lock and key with the ammunition in a foreign country is ridiculous. Load your gun, put it in your holster, and leave the house. There is no point to keeping a gun you cannot access when you need it. If anyone has time to go home and get their gun, they probably didn’t need it in the first place."